- Messages
- 916
There are many other scourges. For example, cancer is pretty bad. Drug abuse is pretty bad. War is pretty bad. Economic depressions are pretty bad. All these things cause a lot of casualties and misery.
But most of us can either rebound from these things or avoid them. Feminism is way more destructive because it affects almost everyone in some pretty bad ways.
One could argue, those of us who are broke losers were destined not to get pussy anyway, so who cares about feminism. Yeah, but chicks will still cause problems even for us, by creating discord among men who otherwise would've gotten along.
Consider the situation if a human female comes into an incel community. Right off the bat, there's discord. It would be a non-issue if some guy had her firmly on a leash, but if that were the case, she wouldn't be there.
No other issues cause that much discord among men. Racial conflict, different views on politics or economics or religion, etc. don't cause that kind of discord.
A chick can come into an incel community, and not give any of those guys any pussy, yet those guys can still be bitter against one another, or disrespect one another, because they perceive that one guy got more positive attention (e.g. nudes), or one guy acted too much like a bluepilled cuck, or whatever.
It's amazing the amount of havoc that chicks can cause when they're allowed to run loose. One could say, "Well, those guys just shouldn't act that way when chicks are around" but it's not really possible to enforce that or promote such a standard effectively in reality; they're going to act in ways they ordinarily wouldn't because they can't really control their responses in a situation where some chick is able to enchant everyone and make them go crazy.
There's just too much instinctual response going on there. And in a "MGTOW" community, the way it will manifest is that the guys who perceive themselves to be at a disadvantage will use the MGTOW doctrine as a bludgeon to hit their peers over the head with. E.g., "You're being bluepilled" is a way to get a potential competitor to stop talking to a chick, by shaming him or just not being nice to him. It's a way of punishing him for his success in getting that girl to give him positive attention. Guys really don't like to see another guy be successful with a chick they like, even if in theory they should root for the success of a friend if they themselves fail with that chick. And some chicks are pretty good at getting all the guys to like them, and to therefore become jealous if they're not the one who gets the most positive attention from her.
Different guys have different responses to such situations, where they're not the one succeeding with a desirable chick. Some become suicidal. Others, though, will lash out at their peers, finding some pretext to hate on them, because they're used to viewing themselves as Chads or whatever, and can't stand to see a guy succeed with a chick that they themselves couldn't succeed with, since this makes them seem less Chadly by comparison.
When you think about it, quite a lot of incarceration results from foids, in one way or another. Child pornography, when it doesn't involve gays, involves foids. We lock people up for years just for looking at pics of young chicks, because the idea is, "You don't have a right to look at that; girls are sacred and not to be defiled with your eyes."
Now that we have this incelosphere, chicks continue to cause conflict because there's this concept that you're not allowed to brag. But before that was a thing, in the PUA-sphere, if you DIDN'T brag about conquests, they'd consider you a misfit because being around incels would tarnish their big-baller image. Again, more conflict arising just because chicks are feral and allowed to make mate choices that arbitrarily put one man above another. Now we're seeing what went around coming around, as these same guys who were banging young girls in the past now are having to settle for girls who have already been banged by other players.
Unfortunately, feminism is also one of the hardest problems to deal with, because it's part of the current power structure. If chicks could be kept under patriarchal control, then we'd see a rise of patriarchs. The establishment doesn't want patriarchy to exist except at the higher economic echelons, so that the building of dynasties is reserved only for the rich. It's kinda like how racial segregation is only available for the rich, who can afford to send their kids to private school and whatnot.
This is the real divide between the rich and the poor, and I don't know that even Bernie Sanders was going to be able to do much to make a dent in it. Even if you give everyone equal health care and equal opportunity to get an education, people still have unequal talents. Maybe we could eliminate all billionaires by taxing them at a 99% rate, but actually to get rid of dynasties we'd probably have to have much more radical leveling than that, because the ability to establish a patriarchy pretty much kicks in when the guy is making like six figures and is brutal enough to maintain patriarchy, or he and his wife belong to a religion that is socially brutal against those who go against the patriarchy.
Even if we did manage to level everything, to where everyone had an equal chance with chicks (aside from that fact that some would still have better looks and whatnot, and therefore an advantage), eliminating the prosperous doesn't necessarily raise the others up; we saw that under communism. We still face the problem that when chicks are allowed to be above men, they don't want to mate with them usually; at any rate, they don't submit to them enough to bear many children.
But most of us can either rebound from these things or avoid them. Feminism is way more destructive because it affects almost everyone in some pretty bad ways.
One could argue, those of us who are broke losers were destined not to get pussy anyway, so who cares about feminism. Yeah, but chicks will still cause problems even for us, by creating discord among men who otherwise would've gotten along.
Consider the situation if a human female comes into an incel community. Right off the bat, there's discord. It would be a non-issue if some guy had her firmly on a leash, but if that were the case, she wouldn't be there.
No other issues cause that much discord among men. Racial conflict, different views on politics or economics or religion, etc. don't cause that kind of discord.
A chick can come into an incel community, and not give any of those guys any pussy, yet those guys can still be bitter against one another, or disrespect one another, because they perceive that one guy got more positive attention (e.g. nudes), or one guy acted too much like a bluepilled cuck, or whatever.
It's amazing the amount of havoc that chicks can cause when they're allowed to run loose. One could say, "Well, those guys just shouldn't act that way when chicks are around" but it's not really possible to enforce that or promote such a standard effectively in reality; they're going to act in ways they ordinarily wouldn't because they can't really control their responses in a situation where some chick is able to enchant everyone and make them go crazy.
There's just too much instinctual response going on there. And in a "MGTOW" community, the way it will manifest is that the guys who perceive themselves to be at a disadvantage will use the MGTOW doctrine as a bludgeon to hit their peers over the head with. E.g., "You're being bluepilled" is a way to get a potential competitor to stop talking to a chick, by shaming him or just not being nice to him. It's a way of punishing him for his success in getting that girl to give him positive attention. Guys really don't like to see another guy be successful with a chick they like, even if in theory they should root for the success of a friend if they themselves fail with that chick. And some chicks are pretty good at getting all the guys to like them, and to therefore become jealous if they're not the one who gets the most positive attention from her.
Different guys have different responses to such situations, where they're not the one succeeding with a desirable chick. Some become suicidal. Others, though, will lash out at their peers, finding some pretext to hate on them, because they're used to viewing themselves as Chads or whatever, and can't stand to see a guy succeed with a chick that they themselves couldn't succeed with, since this makes them seem less Chadly by comparison.
When you think about it, quite a lot of incarceration results from foids, in one way or another. Child pornography, when it doesn't involve gays, involves foids. We lock people up for years just for looking at pics of young chicks, because the idea is, "You don't have a right to look at that; girls are sacred and not to be defiled with your eyes."
Now that we have this incelosphere, chicks continue to cause conflict because there's this concept that you're not allowed to brag. But before that was a thing, in the PUA-sphere, if you DIDN'T brag about conquests, they'd consider you a misfit because being around incels would tarnish their big-baller image. Again, more conflict arising just because chicks are feral and allowed to make mate choices that arbitrarily put one man above another. Now we're seeing what went around coming around, as these same guys who were banging young girls in the past now are having to settle for girls who have already been banged by other players.
Unfortunately, feminism is also one of the hardest problems to deal with, because it's part of the current power structure. If chicks could be kept under patriarchal control, then we'd see a rise of patriarchs. The establishment doesn't want patriarchy to exist except at the higher economic echelons, so that the building of dynasties is reserved only for the rich. It's kinda like how racial segregation is only available for the rich, who can afford to send their kids to private school and whatnot.
This is the real divide between the rich and the poor, and I don't know that even Bernie Sanders was going to be able to do much to make a dent in it. Even if you give everyone equal health care and equal opportunity to get an education, people still have unequal talents. Maybe we could eliminate all billionaires by taxing them at a 99% rate, but actually to get rid of dynasties we'd probably have to have much more radical leveling than that, because the ability to establish a patriarchy pretty much kicks in when the guy is making like six figures and is brutal enough to maintain patriarchy, or he and his wife belong to a religion that is socially brutal against those who go against the patriarchy.
Even if we did manage to level everything, to where everyone had an equal chance with chicks (aside from that fact that some would still have better looks and whatnot, and therefore an advantage), eliminating the prosperous doesn't necessarily raise the others up; we saw that under communism. We still face the problem that when chicks are allowed to be above men, they don't want to mate with them usually; at any rate, they don't submit to them enough to bear many children.
Last edited: